-Caveat Lector-

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date= 
021017&Category==APW&ArtNo=!0170917&Template==printart

Article published Oct 17, 2002
Govt. Haven't Read All Cheney Papers

WASHINGTON (AP) - Government attorneys admitted Thursday they haven't
completely reviewed documents from Vice President Dick Cheney's energy
task force, despite claiming that they "all involve sensitive
communications between and among the president and his closest advisers"
that should be kept secret.

U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered task force documents to
be made public by Nov. 5 and said he was shocked the Justice Department
attorneys had not examined all the documents after asserting for more than
a year that each of them involved confidential information.

"That is a startling revelation," Sullivan said, after rejecting the Bush
administration's claim that he lacks authority to order the release of the
task force papers.

The judge directed the government attorneys to either produce the
documents or supply a list of each one being withheld, and an explanation
of why it is so sensitive.

"It's like everyone else has to do," Sullivan said in explaining why the
task force should have to provide papers on its inner workings. Sullivan
said his intent was "to carve out a middle ground because obviously the
battle lines have been drawn."

The judge said he wanted the documents or the list by Nov. 5 - Election
Day - but gave the government an opportunity to first file objections. He
set another hearing for Oct. 31, but acknowledged a federal appeals court
may end up deciding the issue.

Shannen W. Coffin, a deputy assistant attorney general, said attorneys for
the White House "haven't completed a document review" and that "we're not
going to ask our clients to complete the review" because doing so would be
"too burdensome."

Sharply questioned by the judge, Coffin tried several times to explain
himself more fully, then said he had misspoken.

"We have done a review. We haven't completed it," he said finally. "We
haven't done everything necessary for a (document) production."

In court papers the Justice Department handed out at Thursday's hearing,
the government asserts the task force documents involve "sensitive
deliberations at the highest levels of the executive branch, including
presumptively privileged presidential communications."

The government argues in a Sept. 3 memo that those documents "are all
presumptively privileged because they all involve sensitive communications
between and among the president and his closest advisers," and said that
turning them over would "raise separation-of-powers concerns."

"The fact that all or nearly all of the requested information in a given
case might be privileged suggests the presence, not the absence, of a
separation-of-powers problem," the Justice Department wrote.

Judicial Watch, a conservative-leaning legal rights organization, and
environmentalists have sued for the documents, as has the General
Accounting Office, a congressional investigative agency.

They argue, in several separate federal court cases, the public has a
right to learn the details of any industry influence on the national
energy plan that Cheney's task force put together more than a year ago. An
energy bill the White House calls a top priority and essential to reducing
U.S. dependence on Mideast oil is bogged down in negotiations between the
House and Senate.

Federal agencies that also are defendants in the cases have produced
thousands of pages of documents to the private groups.

Larry Klayman, chairman and general counsel of Judicial Watch, urged the
judge to require quick action by the administration because "what they're
trying to do is to get past the election" next month and, possibly, beyond
the 2004 presidential election.

"Their entire strategy is delay. That's why they're willing to thumb their
nose at the court," Klayman told the court via conference call. He said
White House legal claims based on the substance of the documents, without
first reviewing all of them, is "a demonstration of the bad faith in this
case."

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http://archive.jab.org/ctrl@;listserv.aol.com/
 <A HREF="http://archive.jab.org/ctrl@;listserv.aol.com/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to